25 posts • joined 13 Mar 2012
Re: Anyone see a price anywhere?
"...it's $1.29 per month. If you don't think that is fair, go to privacyrights.org and tell me what your identity protection is worth to you?"
Bit of a low shot there? My privacy is worth a lot more than that but I do not necessarily think I should have to pay to protect it (the quote above made me think of being made an offer I shouldn't refuse or being asked how much I would pay for air). I may be incredibly naive but should we not be rooting out the source of the problem rather than putting band aids over the sores? (I know that is hopelessly utopian )
And please don't shout. It does not strengthen your case. You should definitely not shout about the thing that appears to be making people mad - it makes it look like you are advertising. I won't be a customer, sorry
"And to think that just a few days ago the Reg advanced Marissa Mayer as a candidate for Steve Ballmer's job."
She is just showing 'strong leadership', just like Steve Jobs did (iirc the Jobsian version of all events that upset Apple users was "I am right ..."). Seems to be a popular leadership model in the IT world these days.
Re: brought to you by the same people who want a "porn filter"
"You just don't understand technology do you politicians ..."
No, but they do understand the value of symbolic gestures and I bet they hoped they would get "good press" from this.
@a/c 6th August 2013, 06:27
"So there could also be a correlation between this and the Political Left here in the UK, as they too tend to shout the loudest, have a nastiness and are less forgiving."
Is that you Mr Limbaugh?
Left wing bias in the media? Ah, you must mean The Telegraph and The Sun and those of that ilk. Far too left wing for your liking are they?
I will, not wishing to reinforce your stereotype, refrain from shouting as I point out the complete lack of irony in your complaint about immature trolls. Please do not take offence. I am not accusing you of being immature.
Re: I'm guessing the software is not the point to this device.
as fat people are generally lazy... Until we legislate against the fat people then they will always be there ...
Nice bit of work there. I suppose the flip-side is that all thin people are generally "energetic" (sorry, I Googled that antonym cos I was too lazy to come up with my own - must be because I am fat)
I am "fat". I also eat a lot (which requires a fair bit of effort, you would be hard pushed to call me lazy when it comes to my dietary habits). I go to the gym too, which is a bit of an odd one isn't it? Perhaps I should be legislated against for not fitting in to the stereotype you seem to be pushing there.
I have a friend who is thin. He also eats a lot (a lot more than me in fact). He does not go to the gym. I do not understand it.
Oh well. Time to start thinking about me dinner.
The NSA program in question is not collecting cell phone location information
the Office of the Director of National Intelligence said the NSA program in question (my emphasis) doesn't collect "any cell phone locational information [...]"
Accuse me of paranoia if you will but I really like that the Director of National Intelligence gave a quote that did not say "we do not collect or use cell phone location information", only that the program in question was not doing that. It will, of course, turn out to be a completely different program (or sub-program) that is doing that.
You have to love words and the way "higher-ups" use them.
Re: The problem with British companies is
@Kenno - "Hell look at Witherspoons they pay £17 in taxes and charges for every £1 profit they make."
I am reading that as they lose £16 for every £1 they make. Are you sure that is right - any business doing that would have to be web based ... no other company could sustain such losses and still exist (I remember the initial web bubble well)
If, however, you are saying that it costs them £17 to make £1 profit (so they make £18 for every £17 spent) then that would be a different story entirely - there is always a cost to produce something (if production cost nothing we would all be billionaires. And equally worthless).
"Have you thought for a moment that the strength of BT is actually why the competition sucks? after all, BT has cables to most homes, Virgin doesn't and rolling out fibre to every home would be prohibitively expensive."
I think the argument you put forward misses a very important point and that is that Virgin do not help themselves or make the most of the opportunities there are.
I moved into a new build house (brownfield site) 10 years ago and Virgin had cable running less than 75 metres from the site. BT only offered dial-up (we were over 5km from the nearest exchange) and there were a few examples of shared phone lines (we subsequently found out that we were sharing a physical line with a neighbour). Virgin should have cabled the site when it was being put together and would have had at least 10 customers immediately (there are 26 houses on the estate).
I have a friend who moved into a new build a couple of years ago and while one side of the street has cable the other does not. Virgin, for some reason, missed the opportunity to put cable in when the site was being built and failed to capitalise on the extremely poor broadband provision (BT service regularly falls below half a meg). Virgin have since said they will put cable through to the other side of the street at a cost of £10k, to be paid for by the consumers.
Both of these sites are 3/4 bedroom houses so you would expect families with kids and a call for decent broadband. If Virgin had got their act together then they would have had a lot of captive customers.
Re: Let's hear it you labor-voting lefties...
"Yes, you are avoiding tax - according to the hypocrite lefties around here that think, just because you're financially successful you should somehow be subject to a different set of tax laws."
No. We should all be subject to the same tax laws and be subject to the same levels of tax as defined by those laws regardless of our wealth / privilege etc. This is the key point - some people can afford to avoid tax. The majority can not.
Re: Let's hear it you labor-voting lefties...
"I moved to a new country to pay less tax. Is that avoidance?"
Re: Let's hear it you labor-voting lefties...
"There's nothing to stop you paying more if you want to, but then, I'd guess you too only pay the legal amount as well."
Something winding you up dear?
I think you are missing a very important point - some people get upset at the inequality of such situations. Is it right that having money / position / privilege should open up ways for you to reduce your tax bill? Can I, with my massively lower wealth, do what others are able to regarding tax?
It is not, for me, about envy, it is about equality (or the lack of it).
By the way, I am a higher rate taxpayer and consider it my duty to pay the "full" amount. To find creative ways to avoid paying tax, while not necessarily illegal, strikes me as immoral - I do believe there is such a thing as "community".
I remember the 1970's in the UK. We had a Labour government, at least for part of the time, and we knew how to spell it.
This has to be simple vanity, right?
I can't believe that there is any other purpose to this. Is this really going to stop knock-off stores popping up? Will it be possible to prove that there were no other stores with this layout prior to the application being filed / apple being spewed forth onto the world (I used to like Apple, honest).
Does this mean I need to cancel my bake sale? (I appear to have rectangular tables with chairs underneath that are parallel to a wall, OCD you see, and a twat, which would be me, offering advice and being sneery).
Re: "Apple, Google tumble off top 20 trusted companies list"
"Apple, Google tumble off top 20 trusted companies list"
How the fuck did they ever get there in the first place?
That, my friend, is the joy of Marketing and Brand Awareness. All you need to do is convince people that you are good, you do not have to be good.
Re: Hmmmmmm. morality and lawyers.
"<Sigh> Why is it that some people have to assume anyone that disagrees with their point of view must be raging? Is it easier for you to cope with disagreement if you can dress it up as rage? Gorw up."
I did not suggest that you were raging - I said that there seemed to be a lot of anger in your post, particularly the part where you take the role of defense lawyer (btw, shouting and putting things in quotes does not help the tone of your post).
Re: Hmmmmmm. morality and lawyers.
The paragraph that starts "As for the targets of the revenge postings, ..."
Wow. Seems to be a lot of anger coming through here.
I'd argue that those who were posted about had an expectation of privacy and they should be in control of what is shared about them in such a public manner. It's got little to do about whether they denied the acts.
It is not about people gossiping, it is about people being demeaned.
Do things that show initiative
IMHO candidates who can talk knowledgeably about their subject and show a willingness to learn are better than those who have the qualifications and no passion for the job. You have taught yourself some useful stuff so use that to demonstrate your competence in an interview.
Look at where you want to work and figure out what you need to get a job there. Different company's will require different levels of qualification.
Look at MOOC's (openlearning.com, coursera.org and so on) and see what you can find in the field of computing. Read books to extend your knowledge. Build a network at home (not just a Windows one, either).
I'd be less worried about getting courses under your belt and more about working somewhere that you can claim real life experience.
A couple of points
"As you can see, the workforce's share of the nation's economic output has been falling. Clearly a bad case of the capitalist bastards watering the workers' beer."
The author appears to be claiming that capitalists do not work and that the workforce can not be capitalists (yes I'm being literal but he started with the massive over-simplifications)
I think wage distribution might explain part of the problem too. If wages at all levels increased at the same rate then the comparisons the author makes might be worthy of a bit more scrutiny. It is quite amazing what you can do with a set of figures, a couple of charts and an agenda.
I use RAFT
read it and then decide to
action it <-- if it needs something from me and is quick I do it there and then otherwise schedule some time and mark it for follow-up
file it <-- needs no action but is useful, use auto-filing to put things where they should be
trash it <-- more than 90% goes here
The first rule of the Internet ...
Wow. Much used information source is not accurate / has been corrupted / does not tell the truth. Just like us human beings really, only on a much, much larger scale.
Wow again. Document contains factual inaccuracy.
Double wow. Researcher does not check every "fact".
Does this mistake in the report materially affect the main points being made? If it does for you then I humbly suggest that you may be missing the point of the whole debate.
Diablo, 1997 (?)
Y'know, Apple has way too much money to throw around.
Here's an idea
All commentards should be forced to pay two pence (or cents) when they give their "two cents worth". That would generate a few billion to share around wherever it is needed. Or stop a lot of angry, uninformed venting.
Re: Have they not heard of load balancing?
There are very rarely no single points of failure. If the power or communications to your data centre(s) has a single provider or a common provider there is a single point. To get true redundancy you would need to isolate every single component in the infrastructure and, perhaps, have a separate data centre on a different continent (because you might need to consider if your main and backup centres are on a single or connected fault line - the building and ground are points of potential failure). Of course, you would then need to understand how the communications links are provisioned to ensure that a shark could not remove your redundancy if it fancied a bit of cabling ...
I now this is extreme pedantry but I get a bit peeved when I am asked if we can remove all single points of failure. As ever, there is an acceptable level of risk and an acceptable level of cost to mitigate risk.
The corporation's strongest argument is one it has some trepidation in using
"The corporation's strongest argument is one it has some trepidation in using. The BBC can argue that revenue raised through on-demand iPlayer repeats is much, much fairer and more progressive than its primary (regressive) revenue stream today."
I love the argument that you should only pay for what you watch - it completely glosses over the idea that we all contribute for the overall good of the many (this whole "community" thing, y'know. ).
I'd like to only pay for what I watch on Sky but cannot, I have to buy the whole "bundle" - if I want to watch Rugby Union then I have to have the sports channels even though I do not watch football. I am, therefore, paying more for my product then the many that do watch football on Sky. I demand a refund and that those watching football be forced to pay 5 times as much as me.
- Vid Hubble 'scope scans 200,000-ton CHUNKY CRUMBLE ENIGMA
- Bugger the jetpack, where's my 21st-century Psion?
- Google offers up its own Googlers in cloud channel chumship trawl
- Interview Global Warming IS REAL, argues sceptic mathematician - it just isn't THERMAGEDDON
- Apple to grieving sons: NO, you cannot have access to your dead mum's iPad